Tuesday, February 19, 2008

My nominee decision:

Understanding who Saddam Hussein was - his revulsion of al qeda and all Islamic militants, the failure of reputable researchers to find *any* material evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the long desired acquisition of Iraqi oil by American oil interests and George Bush, and the desire to fatten the pocketbook of Dick Cheney's employer Halliburton - giving the multinational corporation the bidless contract to rebuild the destroyed invaded nation for billions of American tax dollars and many more billions borrowed from other nations like China and India, not to mention the US National Intelligence Estimate advising against it -- it seems to me that any informed representative or senator would have voted against it.

In fact many did, including Obama. Clinton admitted not reading the NIE report, which would have, in my opinion, chilled anyone's desire to allow any military action in Iraq.

Second, it's been widely reported just in the past two days that part - if not the majority - of the reason Clinton's campaign has run into trouble is because she hired people based more on their loyalty to her than clear, cold qualifications.

We have lived for nearly eight years with a president who values loyalty more than qualifications and the result has not only been a shockingly substandard and corrupt administration, but a government whose wheels have come off all three branches of government - executive, judicial and legislative - and needlessly cost countless lives in an illegal war and natural catastrophies such as Katrina, whose destruction is *still* not rectified despite President Bush's shameful broken promise that the federal government would give them appropriate and proper assistance following the devastation.

To be fair - unlike George Bush, Hillary Clinton appears to learn lessons from her mistakes, which is great and will ultimately make her a fine leader. But as someone pointed out awhile back, the decisions she made are too costly to have a "do over" or take time to learn and then only after her campaign suffered so greatly.

Barack Obama did not vote to empower George Bush, and he has been consistently meeting with individuals throughout his campaign to surround himself with qualified, topnotch personnel if and when he is nominated to be the Democrat's nominee for the presidency, as well as if he is elected President of the United States.

Having powerhouses like Oprah Winfrey support him does not mean these people passively give him the nod. He does not surround himself with "yes" people or any sycophants who are there to massage his ego. They are there to make him a better person and leader.

Obama is by no means perfect. But, in my opinion, he has put himself on a track and in the company of those who will make sure he does not sell out or have any other goal than to serve the best interests of American citizens.